Navigation
Search

JPBC Minutes: April 29, 2021

Thursday, April 29, 2021

8:30 – 10:30 am, Virtual Meeting via Teams

Attendees

Voting Members

  • Mike Andriatch
  • Justine Briggs
  • Kalista Cherry
  • Frances Dearing
  • Kandie Gay
  • Daniel Goebel
  • Tom Hernandez
  • Katy Heyning
  • Cathy Houston-Wilson
  • Sharon Jaramillo
  • Margaret Lane
  • Jose Maliekal
  • Dave Mihalyov
  • Kathy Peterson
  • Craig Ross
  • Janet Roy
  • Mark Stacy
  • Elliot Weininger
  • Katy Wilson

Non-Voting Members

  • Denise Copelton: Co-Chair
  • Crystal Hallenbeck
  • Darson Rhodes: Co-Chair Elect
  • Karen Riotto
  • James Spiller
  • Jim Wall: Co-Chair
  • Melissa Wight

Guests

  • Lorraine Acker
  • Nathan Bull
  • Lynda Cochran
  • Steve Cook
  • Mary Covell
  • Bob Cushman
  • Eileen Daniel
  • Rich Dirmyer
  • Deborah Ferris
  • Jennifer Green
  • Mike Harrison
  • Anna Hintz
  • Mehruz Kamal
  • Alissa Karl
  • Sara Kelly
  • Rachael Killion
  • Alex Leonty
  • Joseph Long
  • Jason Morris
  • Donna Napier
  • Carl O’Connor
  • Milo Obourn
  • Karen Podsiadly
  • Karen Proehl
  • Alexander Rhea
  • Rey Sia
  • Dana Weiss
  • James Zollweg

Regrets

Voting Members

  • Sondra Aman
  • Hannah Arp
  • James Cordeiro

Non-Voting Members

  • President Macpherson

The meeting was called to order at 8:32 am.

Announcements

Dr. Copelton made the following announcements:

  • The last JPBC meeting of the year will be on May 20, 2021. That day was originally being held for both a JPBC meeting and a JPBC Task Force meeting until it could be determined which group would need to meet on that day. JPBC Task Force members will receive a meeting cancellation from Ms. Wight.
  • There is a Budget Town Hall scheduled for today at noon. The Teams link was sent out earlier in the week by Julie Pruss.

Fee-based Budget Requests Vote

Members reviewed the fee-based budget summary, comments and voting results from the sub-committee. The following discussion points occurred during the review:

  • The concern was stated that the fees should not be voted on as a group, but individually as this is an unprecedent year and other areas are having their budget cuts. A motion was put forward to vote on the fees individually by Dr. Weininger and seconded by Dean Goebel. The following discussion points occurred related to the motion:
    • It was stated in the past, that is was established for the sub-committee to conduct the work of the fee budget request debate and it was the role of JPBC to either endorse or not endorse the sub-committee’s decision.
    • The membership of the sub-committee was outlined to show the specific individuals and positions that are involved in the sub-committee’s decision-making process.
    • Members voted on the motion. The following voting results are from the present voting members:
      • In Favor - 3
      • Not in Favor - 10
  • A motion was put forward to by Dr. Peterson to vote to endorse the sub-committee’s decision on the fee-based budget requests and seconded by Dr. Houston-Wilson.
    • The following voting results are from the present voting members:

      • Endorse – 10

      • Not Endorse – 2

DIFR, BASC and BSG Budget Presentations

(Presentations are available on Teams and in Blackboard)

Dr. Copelton clarified that these are budgets over which JPBC has no formal role. The committee does not approve these budgets. These groups are just asked to come and give a presentation on an informational basis.

DIFR Budget Presentation

Presented by Dr. Craig Ross, Cross Divisional Budget and Facility Officer; Dr. Sara Kelly, Assistant Vice President for Enrollment Management and Student Affairs; Carl O’Connor, Interim Associate Director

 

Dr. Ross, Dr. Kelly and Mr. O’Connor provided the budget presentation for DIFR. The following questions, answers and discussion points occurred:

  • The suggestion was made to complete a five-year model for the DIFR budget similar to what is done for the State budget due to debt repayment schedule. It was stated that this report could be completed for the short-term, but something similar is completed for the capital plan that is submitted to SUNY in June. It was suggested to share that report with JPBC. It was agreed that the five-year model would be included in the DIFR budget update in the fall.
  • The question was raised regarding the $6.6 million bond repayment and if it was an annual obligation. It was stated that it is an annual obligation.
  • The question was raised given that DIFR is ending this year with a balance of $11 million, next year the $6.6 million bond repayment will be an obligation again because there was only a one-year delay provided in the repayment. It was stated that the obligation will return in 2022-23, so the delay is for the current year we are in and next year.
  • The question was raised if one of the residential halls could remain vacant to provide flexibility in the budget so that the goal of 1850-1900 residential students to maintain the sustainable DIFR budget may be lowered. It was stated leaving a residential hall vacant would not provide that flexibility. Mortimer is going to remain vacant, but the staff savings for the building doesn’t come close to balancing the budget. The staff savings would be a residential director, one or two cleaners (depending on the size of the building) and some utility costs, but you still need to heat the building minimally. It was also stated that there are about 80-90 positions that are funded by DIFR that are not in the residential halls. DIFR also funds $1.3 million of the scholarship program. We are looking into ways to save money, but for now we are going to focus on increasing our occupancy rates over the next year to see what happens with a more normal year. We will be monitoring what things we might need to do over the next several years.
  • The question was raised regarding where on-campus housing compares competitively with the local off-campus housing options. It was stated that Brockport is unique compared to some of the other SUNY schools as it doesn’t just have the typical off-campus housing, it has apartment complexes that are not just for students, they take students and not students. For location in terms of proximity, programming and safety and security, on-campus ranks high in those areas. Off-campus pricing tends to be cheaper than on-campus housing. This is why we reviewed our price structure. In addition, singles are what students want. That is why we tried to make the singles more available to students by reducing the cost. We have received positive feedback from students regarding this change. Also, there used to be a premium charge for Eagle Hall, and we have gotten rid of that. Eagle Hall is now the standard rate and we have been marketing that information out to students. We have gotten about 20-30 students so far that want to change to Eagle Hall by getting rid of that charge. The townhomes are still a popular option for students because they are four single rooms, a private kitchen and students are not required to have a meal plan if they live there. We are also working with Gradate Studies with providing some graduate housing in the Townhomes. We haven’t gotten much interest in that, but we are trying to market to graduate students from downstate and to the graduate students that need to be on campus for their program. We do keep an eye on the apartment complexes prices and make sure we stay comparable with amenities and price. Students do like that the on-campus housing costs goes back to their student bill and they don’t have to keep track of the monthly bills, so we try to market that aspect as well.
  • The question was raised regarding the occupancy decline in 2019-20 and if it was parallel to enrollment trends or was it different from the enrollment trends. It was stated that enrollment was part of it and prior year retention rates catching up to us. Retention rates were steady that year. The concern is fall and spring of this year because we are three percent lower. The overall enrollment picture is something we are struggling with. We did have more students taking leaves going into the fall semester and some students didn’t come back. People seem to be waiting out the pandemic to see what happens. We are trying to do everything we can to welcome back the students that took leaves, to get them registered for the fall and hopefully to live on campus.

BASC Budget Presentation - presented by Dana Weiss, Executive Director of BASC

Ms. Weiss provided the budget presentation for BASC. The following questions, answers and discussion points occurred:

  • Clarification was requested that the refunds provided last year were about $2.5 million and they were deducted from last year’s budget. It was stated that was correct.
  • The question was raised if the pilot for the inclusive access model was delayed. It was stated that it was delayed due to COVID. There is a movement and trend to move to an inclusive access model for classroom materials. Barnes and Noble does have a couple of different models for this. Some of the community colleges and many of the private colleges have adopted some of the models. We were working on this with SUBOA, SUNY, the Comptroller’s Office and the former SUNY Chancellor’s office. What the program involves is instead of students buying their books individually, the students are charged a flat fee and receive all the classroom materials that they need. Faculty members would still be able to choose their classroom materials and this would not impede academic freedom. The stumbling block in the process was the SUNY fee structure. There was one class that we were going to pilot in last fall and we were working with Cabinet, Provost and Dr. Zollweg. Unfortunately, this is did not happen due to COVID. This fee is something that we should work towards implementing because this is the trend that the industry is moving into. It is believed that Buffalo State will be the first comprehensive implementing the model this fall and that will help provide a road map for us.
  • The question was raised if the inclusive access model would impact the bookstore revenues. It was stated that it would impact the revenue. BASC receives a commission from the bookstore. The bookstore commission is a large portion of the college support that is passed on to the College. This is an important revenue stream to the College. If it can be implemented in the correct way, it could be a positive result all the way around.
  • The question was raised if BASC could share the amount that they currently have in reserves. It was stated that they could not share the amount at this time.
  • The question was raised if BASC could share the amount that they have in reserves during their update in the fall. It was stated they would share in the fall when they have a better idea of what their budget will be.
  • The question was raised if there is any indication that the PPP loan would not be able to achieve grant status. It was stated that the goal is to have the loan forgiven, but the complexities lie in accessing other federal programs, including any funding that would be available from the campus. The guidelines need to be reviewed very carefully so that we do not jeopardize the grant.
  • The question was raised regarding what the funding support that BASC provides to the College is used for. It was stated that the college support funds that many departments receive is from this funding. The college support funds are about 25% of the annual amount provided by BASC. The remainder is added to reserves and used to help operate the campus. We do budget this in our five-year model as one of the revenue streams that we anticipate coming in to support our operations and help balance our annual operating budget.
  • BASC was thanked for everything that they have done in terms of serving the campus. Especially in the difficulties of this year and all the things the BASC did in conjunction with Bringing Brockport Back and Residential Life, this campus would be in a very different situation if it were not for BASC.

BSG Budget Presentation - presented by Kalista Cherry, BSG Treasurer

Ms. Cherry provided the budget presentation for BASC. The following questions, answers and discussion points occurred:

  • Confirmation was requested that the Stylus has not been printed this year. It was stated that the Stylus has not been printed this year.
  • Confirmation was requested that it is unknown whether the Stylus will resume printing in the fall. It was stated that BSG is unsure if the Stylus will resume printing in the fall.
  • The question was raised regarding if the production of news articles is still occurring for the Stylus, but they are just posting them to the online version. It was stated that it does not appear that they are engaging as much as they have in the past, but they are still posting articles.

Other Items from the Committee

  • None at this time.

The meeting was adjourned at 10:18 a.m.

DC/JW/mw